Racial Memory

[Sol Invictus]

http://aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.ca/2009/06/racial-memory.html

[Burzum fan]

There's truth to this. There's a peculiar Heathen or European nostalgia that many of us feel, no matter where we live or how we were raised.

When I was little I had a peculiar nostalgic love for everything ancient-European themed (or ancient Asian to a lesser extent, insofar as they were similar). I loved fantasy books/movies/games not always for the magical "fantasy" elements but because they took place in "ancient times," which I found inexplicably appealing. I used to think "I was born in the wrong time" for aesthetic reasons, long before I thought so for ideological/religious reasons. I also instinctively associated the European phenotype (particularly the Nordic) with spiritual values due to no external influence I can imagine.

Snow and mountains have always been a setting that stirred something powerful in me, like a spiritual experience. Skiing, especially in the large mountains, always put me in a certain state of consciousness.

By the time I was 16, those feelings had been mostly forgotten. However, I discovered race realism and from there White nationalism and from there National Socialism. From there I discovered Heathenism. I then found myself in a state of internal conflict where my spirit was Heathen (though my understanding of it was and is still confused) while my reason still seemed to ground me in agnosticism.

It was the pantheon and the runes in particular that attracted me, though religious ritual did as well. New age witchcraft never attracted me, but the runes attracted me at a profound level (even while I called myself atheist). I'm also attracted to the idea of hailing the sun, or a "sun god," which I always thought was cool even before I found out that a "sun cult" is part of my distant Aryan heritage, perhaps older than our race itself.

Now I'm drawing a connection between those longings. I don't think I'm alone in this at all and there are probably many like me here and in among the largely overlapping nationalist and Heathen communities at large.

[Anglojew]

I believe in a folk memory.

[Kazimiera]

I have never felt the remotest connection to Northern or Western Europe. I had a friend who was a Heathen and we spent a lot of time together, but it fell completely flat on me.

[Barbarossa]

I don't belive in any such thing as racial memory which would be based on biological level. I do however belive in a myth of nations, tribes etc. Nietzsche did in his early work The Birth of tragedy placed myth in centre of every culture and according to this myth gave culture it's vitality. I found seeds of truth in this. Myth, as irrational doctrine, forged through times is some kind of folk memory or more precisly tradition and give to it's believers some kind of basis for creating tradition and culture. Let's just look Greek civilisation where myths were primary subjects of all great forms of art. However, despite much of let's say ''volkish'' or ''primordial'' tradition compose much of nation's view of past let's remember about process of nation building! When the first phase according to Hroch was phase when intelectuals collected folk songs, customs etc. and we must be aware that this process give some traditions which were favoured by first national leaders acchived through the media (book, first publishing houses, national movement events etc.) much wider distribution than some, which remained and still are only in the domain of some very rural regions and are known only by ethnologist and enthuiasts. When speaking about some folk's memory and myth we must always taken all this into account.

@Burzumfan: I think that some kinds of heathen nostalgia and primordial fascination over woods and mountains are utter nonsense. What is heathen nostalia in reality? Heathenism is a long death religion and are revivals are subjected to varrious ideologies and we all in reality don't realy have a clue how our ancestor experienced their religion. Firstly, all sources we have are eithers myths, either rural tradition, either accounts writen by already Christian writers, mostly monks. So we don't have any realy first handed source about it (only myth but anyone could read them with different eyes).

Heathenism does not left any single work of theology or work which describe beliefs in observant way. It can be present something like folklore nostaligia or national romaniticism but this is actually quite different and people who adhere to this sets of beliefs have view already subjected to the modern ideologies. Let me just mention connection between new paganism and ideology of good savage which is in fundament modern idea. Or connection of it to volkish ideologies of germanic space which appear for the first time in late 19th century!

Secondly I don't realy understand this new ideology which describe itself as traditionalism and is really mix of various modern ideologies. Lets take for example originism of ''new heathen national-socialism''.

1) Good savage idea of Rosseau.
2) National romanticism of 19th century
3) Anti-monarchism of 19th century
4) Socialism
5) German national-socialism
6) American KKK style racism mixed with pseudo-intellectual production of blokes like David Lane and David Duke
7) Silly germanophillia withought any knowledge of real German nationalism
8) Uncritical worship of viking above any others culture in late antiquity and early medieval era, despite vikings was more barbarian than most of others.

Let's say, that this ideology isn't really ideology but most a ideological mess :D

[Burzum fan]

What is heathen nostalia in reality? Heathenism is a long death religion and are revivals are subjected to varrious ideologies and we all in reality don't realy have a clue how our ancestor experienced their religion. Firstly, all sources we have are eithers myths, either rural tradition, either accounts writen by already Christian writers, mostly monks. So we don't have any realy first handed source about it (only myth but anyone could read them with different eyes).

The myths are great for understanding the personalities of the gods and goddesses, even better than dogmatic teachings. The difference is that unlike Christianity, Heathenism isn't foreign to our nature. Therefore, the way we interpret and relate to it is different, and more intuitive.

Interpretation of Christianity is just as "subjected to various ideologies" and the religion is in decline in all the White world, while Heathenism is experiencing a revival. This is especially true in NW Europe, and especially Scandinavia, where Germanic Heathenism held out the longest.



Heathenism does not left any single work of theology or work which describe beliefs in observant way. It can be present something like folklore nostaligia or national romaniticism but this is actually quite different and people who adhere to this sets of beliefs have view already subjected to the modern ideologies. Let me just mention connection between new paganism and ideology of good savage which is in fundament modern idea. Or connection of it to volkish ideologies of germanic space which appear for the first time in late 19th century!

I have no idea what this "new paganism" is, but it's not my Heathenism. However, the "volkish" ideologies aren't so bad in my opinion, and are compatible with Heathenism.


Secondly I don't realy understand this new ideology which describe itself as traditionalism and is really mix of various modern ideologies. Lets take for example originism of ''new heathen national-socialism''.

1) Good savage idea of Rosseau.
2) National romanticism of 19th century
3) Anti-monarchism of 19th century
4) Socialism
5) German national-socialism
6) American KKK style racism mixed with pseudo-intellectual production of blokes like David Lane and David Duke
7) Silly germanophillia withought any knowledge of real German nationalism
8) Uncritical worship of viking above any others culture in late antiquity and early medieval era, despite vikings was more barbarian than most of others.

Let's say, that this ideology isn't really ideology but most a ideological mess :D

I don't understand this "traditionalism" you're describing either. Also, I've never known of anyone who used the term "new heathen national-socialism".

1) I don't subscribe to that.
2) That's not essential to Heathenism, though they're highly compatible.
3) I don't know how relevant "anti-monarchism" is today or what it has to do with Heathenism.
4) That's got nothing to do with Heathenism.
5) That's not essential to Heathenism, though I'd argue they're compatible.
6) I don't subscribe to "KKK style racism" (which wasn't what most people think it was anyway), or David Lane's ideas. As for David Duke, he's got nothing to do with Heathenism.
7) I'm not like that.
8) Real Heathens are most certainly not like that, though the Vikings had the best ships in the world at the time, and were not as purely barbarian as you think.

Your whole criticism reads like that of an "anti-racist". It's mostly straw man lies straight out of the mainstream media.

[Barbarossa]

'' The myths are great for understanding the personalities of the gods and goddesses, even better than dogmatic teachings. The difference is that unlike Christianity, Heathenism isn't foreign to our nature. Therefore, the way we interpret and relate to it is different, and more intuitive. ''

This isn't true as such for more reasons. Firstly, everyone with basic knowledge about historiography knows about criticism of sources. And according to source for paganism, with an exception for Greek and Roman religions is too few sources. The main sources for Germanic paganism are with an exception of poetic Edda all written after the Christianity prevailed in Germanic countries and therefore is huge possibility that this sources are written with Christian eyes. And according to Poetic Edda I still remain firm in my stance that since those mythological text are written in metaphors they are now necessary watched with modern eyes and we don't really know what were beliefs of our ancestors. So every heathen belief nowadays is de facto neo-pagan if you like that or not.

Secondly, is Christianity really foreign to our nature? I think that this view is too narrow minded. Firstly, Christianity spread over Europe and remained here till enlightenment (but which actually only secularised Christian ideals) and remain very firm. It is true that Christianity was sometimes spread very violently however in majority of cases this isn't true since Charlemagne took advice from Alquin, Irish monk, and Christianised peoples of Europe with words and also with incorporation of folklore into Christian liturgy and festivals. Another reason against the claim that Christianity is against our nature is that I have never here any serious definition of what our nature is. I only heard various speculations from uneducated people. Another reason which I will mention here is that Europe as such, develop and connected with each others under the times when Christianity was already prevalent religion and therefore very influenced world view of our ancestor. Europe was Christianised when Constantin the great accepted Christianity, like it or not.

And my last point here will be connected with pagan myths. J.R.R Tolkien which was Oxford professor of philology (and wrote serious academic papers on mythology) and devoted Catholic saw myths as first expression of truth in European nation and therefore as some forerunner of Christianity in Europe, rather then opposition to it. Just take this into account. I'm sceptical of both views. I saw myths of important part of European culture. Nothing less, nothing more.

'' Interpretation of Christianity is just as "subjected to various ideologies" and the religion is in decline in all the White world, while Heathenism is experiencing a revival. This is especially true in NW Europe, and especially Scandinavia, where Germanic Heathenism held out the longest. ''

Your view about Christianity is only partly true and can be only applied to protestant type of Christianity where Bible is subjected to believers interpretation and it is not to be explained by the higher authority. However, I found it silly that they don't acknowledge authority of the Church for teaching of doctrine, but they do recognise Church authority that selected canon of scripture.

So why Roman Catholicism can not be it's main features can not be subjected to ideologies. ( I do not claim that in many ways can be, and was and is, however difference here is that main credo of the Church is the same since first ecumenical councils and it is interpreted by authority of the Church.) New paganism is on the hand in it's essence subjected to ideologies and interpretations of individual. Because of metaphorical nature of its texts and because of lack of sources one can almost literally chose words of his gods. This is main difference between all Christianity and new Paganism. With Christianity, you either take whole or nothing in paganism you have choice!

'' I have no idea what this "new paganism" is, but it's not my Heathenism. However, the "volkish" ideologies aren't so bad in my opinion, and are compatible with Heathenism. ''

Like I said before, any paganism nowadays it is new paganism. Old one died 1000 years ago and nobody can ever bring It back. And those volkish ideologies created what nowadays people think is heathenism so of course they are compatible with it.



'' I don't understand this "traditionalism" you're describing either. Also, I've never known of anyone who used the term "new heathen national-socialism".

1) I don't subscribe to that.
2) That's not essential to Heathenism, though they're highly compatible.
3) I don't know how relevant "anti-monarchism" is today or what it has to do with Heathenism.
4) That's got nothing to do with Heathenism.
5) That's not essential to Heathenism, though I'd argue they're compatible.
6) I don't subscribe to "KKK style racism" (which wasn't what most people think it was anyway), or David Lane's ideas. As for David Duke, he's got nothing to do with Heathenism.
7) I'm not like that.
8) Real Heathens are most certainly not like that, though the Vikings had the best ships in the world at the time, and were not as purely barbarian as you think. ''

Firstly, this term nobody use since I invented it, however it gives quite an accurate presentation of world view of most of present ''heathens'' and ''national-socialists''. Why? Firstly, let us remember of very concept of new national-socialism and what it's followers imagine it is. It is made out of most elements of ideologies and world views I mentioned before. Ideological and political concepts of new NS and new heathenism come to being from very particular source and aren't just tradition like you want it to be.

Now I will give you also reasons why I mentioned this particular ideas.

1) Idea of good savage. It is true that it was accepted in neo-pagan and new NS circles differently than it meant originally but anyway it still do carry some of its original meaning and this is worship of primordial against culture or civilisation. If you look at a lot of arguments neo-pagan writers use you will find a lot of labels for Rome, Greece and Christian states of middle ages as decadent and degenerate. Another point of this is worship of farmers as part of blut & boden mindset against aristocracy or scholars. This is basically same view than it is in communist worship of proletarian mass only in different package.
2) National romanticism is essential to heathenism since enthusiasm about folklore which can be found in national romanticism create foundation for neo-paganism and it is not vice versa. For centuries before nobody gave a shit about paganism as religion only myths found reception among humanist, several monks and on several courts as nation literature. And this was in it's essence reaction against Italian claims of exclusiveness in field of culture as heir of Roman empire.
3) Anti-monarchism is fundamental in creation of all ideologies based on ''volkish'' ideas. Because dynastic loyalism was an obstacle against ideology of people as sovereign which was key factor in genesis of volkish thought and therefore also new paganism. Also, with revolt again monarchs by the grace of god come revolt against Christianity.
4) Socialism is not important to heathenism a lot, but since a lot of neo-pagans adhere to NS ideology we cannot ignore this fact too.
5) Same argument than before.
6) Like I said my criticism of paganism that you described come also from a point of ideology since new paganism is always connected with some other ideology. Left or right. And all of those ''ideologies'' and ''thinkers'' are important in genesis of what people think that is new national-socialism.
7) Come on, admit it 99% percent of new pagans are germanophiles. If you aren't this is rare like a diamond in the dust. I used to listen a lot of pagan and black metal bands ( well I still listen to them since I like that form of art) and I know how is with that.
8) Most of them are. However I didn't said that Vikings were barbarians as such, actually barbarians couldn't wrote poetic Edda but they were certainly barbarians in comparison to the Franks and other peoples of that time, however this is most likely product of harsh nature of Scandinavia. My criticism here was of giving Vikings to much importance in a lot of pagan circles that anything else.

And about your heathen renaissance. Where do you see this? I don't see much of respected people being part of neo-pagan organisation. This are marginal groups and nothing more. Sorry, but this is clear to everyone who is not part of this ideology. But is you want to read some really good work about pagan concepts in our times I can recommend you work of Alain De Benoist: On being a pagan, which describe paganism as some sort of intellectual temperament instead of organisation of blokes dressing up as Vikings.

And for the end, I'm not racist, I'm just a conservative and traditionalist. I don't really think of racial ideas as serious. Come on man, get real. Do you really believe that people from all over the world would connect on the basis of skin colour? I don't think so, it is unrealistic and stupid. What have I in common with American redneck or with bloke from Australia? Nothing really and I certainly prefer Iranian traditionalist like Nasr than a ultra liberal may-68 type of guy from France for example. My criticism it is certainly not what you would read in brain dead mainstream media, but it is just of product of my thinking about the subject with rational brain. I don't like political correctness as such, when I spoke many times positive about regimes of Franco or Dolfuss or about monarchies I also crossed line of political correctness. Isn't this in ''NS'' circles insult just like is racist for the left wingers?

[Burzum fan]

Asatru is the only religion I've ever heard of people practising, despite admittedly not being true believers, simply because it makes them happy. That's the evidence that fits our nature.

Here's something to show you how it's growing: http://ibloga.blogspot.ca/2008/10/asatru-believers-wants-to-go-to-war-in.html

The rising popularity of Heathenism is mostly in northern Europe. I wouldn't be aware of it here if it weren't for the internet.

As for picking and choosing with Heathenism, I don't see the problem. Our beliefs can vary. With Christianity, you've got the Holy Bible which is the "word of God," including the part about Noah's ark. Plus, God wasn't even original and his Jesus character is just a rip off of Horus the sun God.

Maybe I'll come back and reply more thoroughly later.

P.S. If the Pope talks to God, why didn't God inform the Pope back in the day that Galileo was right?